January has been a busy month for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the permanent mission to the United Nations and for its diplomats. That is all because our country for the first time took the presidency of the United Nations Security Council. Over the course of a month, within the walls of the building on 405 East 42nd Street in New York City, about thirty meetings, briefings and consultations were held under Kazakhstan’s presidency. This paper presents a short resume of Kazakhstan’s presidency for the UN Security Council.

In January 2018, the Council held a number of meetings addressing major crises in the Middle East. On the first formal meeting on its agenda were the protests in Iran, which took place in December 2017, and a concern of appropriateness of raising human rights’ issue in the Council, which evoked different reactions among the Members. While the US representative Mrs. Haley among other European Members pointed out that “freedom and human dignity cannot be separated from peace and security”, the Bolivian delegation, for example, stressed that “the undisguised attempts by some delegations to push for meetings on issues that do not pose a threat to international peace and security … risk the Security Council being instrumentalized for political ends”. By the same token, Kuwait’s representative Mr. Alotaibi appealed to the UN Charter in order to call upon other delegations to “respect for the sovereignty of States, non-interference in their internal affairs”. As far as Kazakhstan goes, Mr. Umarov underscored that Iran’s recent event pronouncedly belong to “a domestic issue that does not fall under the mandate of the Security Council since it does not represent a threat to international peace and security”.

Peacekeeping operations in various African countries such as the UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) or the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) help conflict-prone or torn countries to create necessary conditions for sustainable peace. In relation to the agenda on the African countries, the Security Council adopted one resolution and issued two official statements: the situation in the Central African Republic (S/RES/2399 (2018)), peace consolidation in West Africa (S/PRST/2018/3) and reports of the Secretary-General on the Sudan and South Sudan (S/PRST/2018/4). The discussed subjects had a variety of concerns including but not limited to the ongoing clashes between armed groups in CAP, maintenance of the provisions of the Conakry Accords and its complete implementation in Guinea-Bissau, or demanding all parties to meet sustainable solutions for Darfur’s 2.7 million internally displaced persons (IDPs).

Afghanistan and Central Asia

Kazakhstan among other matters initiated discussions dedicated to Afghanistan. For almost two decades, the landlocked country was immersed in a fractured nature of the conflict and has been a source of concern among the Central Asian states. Instability in the northern part of the country from the security perspective is becoming increasingly worrisome for its immediate neighbors such as Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.

Within the dearth of empirical data since 2010, one of the main achievements of Kazakhstan was the Security Council mission to Afghanistan that took place in the period from 12 to 15 February. The Delegation has met more than 120 representatives of the government and non-governmental sector and gathered the first-hand information regarding country’s needs, interests, and priorities. Both the Security Council and the Afghan side have expressed a necessity not only to expand greater regional cooperation but also have noted the importance of providing development assistance and ensuring coherence among the United Nations organizations operating on the Afghan soil. The issue of active expansion of women’s rights in Afghanistan, which was discussed with the First lady and representatives of women’s non-governmental organizations, has not bypassed negotiations at the meeting table.

In the context of bringing peace and stability to Afghanistan of specific interest is the ministerial debate on building a regional partnership in Afghanistan and Central Asia, which took place on January 19. Kazakhstan, in turn, offered an interestingly revisionist account of strengthening a security and development link (see S/PV.8162). Even though it might be more complicated than it seems to the eye, expanding investment opportunities for trade, infrastructure, energy exchanges, market solutions and connectivity is what should be accepted as a new paradigm. Namely, taking into account the human capital and promise of Afghanistan, the palatable concept of the interconnectedness of security and development matters for combatting terrorism, violence, and illicit drug trafficking, according to Kazakhstan’s side, this can become a promising example of the so-called model zone of peace, cooperation, and security.

Non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction

It is worth mentioning that Kazakhstan in recent years has put forward a number of initiatives aimed at promoting the goals of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. In particular, Kazakhstan gave up its 4th nuclear arsenal in the world at the end of the Soviet era, proposed to develop a treaty on universal horizontal and vertical non-proliferation and launched the ATOM (Abolish testing – our mission) project.

On the ground of the Council, the high-level thematic briefing was held on January 18 and was chaired by President Nazarbayev. The issue of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was raised. First and foremost, Kazakhstan proposed to complicate the withdrawal process from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) including imposing limited sanctions and other coercive measures if necessary. Moreover, Astana took a step for superseding an approach and encouraged the so-called “Nuclear five countries” to provide security guarantee for North Korea making it as an important condition for returning Pyongyang at the meeting table. What is more to the point, Kazakhstan is ready to accept mediation role and provide its platform for future negotiations. President noted that one of the long-sighted and effective measures to stop a proliferation of WMD is the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones. “That was accomplished in Central Asia, and I hope that the nuclear Powers will recognize that step and ensure our protection. It is important to pursue efforts to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.” – concluded Nazarbayev. As a reference, in 2006 the foreign ministers of all Central Asian countries signed a Treaty establishing the Central Asian Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. One can’t fail to agree that Kazakhstan’s trade-off approach can be an illustrative example for Korean crisis settlement.

Kazakhstan is the first Central Asian country elected to the UN SC. Summing up the performance during its presidency, it must be highlighted that the members of the Council highly appreciated the contribution of the Kazakh side to the international peace and security issues. The thematic issues raised in the Council conditionally involved the following: Africa and the Middle East, Afghanistan and Central Asia, non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. With the limited nature of the veto power given to five permanent members, Kazakhstan still has a leeway to make a name for itself and gain valuable diplomatic experience. Taking into account the multi-vector nature of the Kazakhstani foreign policy it is in the interest of the country to make every possible effort for strengthening relations and avoid serious disagreements with all Council members while maintaining on the ground the neutral foreign policy.

Prepared by Madina Bizhanova

]]>https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/outcomes-of-kazakhstans-presidency-of-the-un-security-council/feed/0nupsrserveimage.jpeg2018-01-18-747901af417d5f4d2d09b60d78dd0d41ded03c-1024x563“Memories of the Flame of Afghanistan”https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/09/24/memories-of-the-flame-of-afghanistan/
https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/09/24/memories-of-the-flame-of-afghanistan/#respondSun, 24 Sep 2017 04:47:18 +0000http://nupsreview.wordpress.com/?p=1357On Wednesday, 20th of September, in Astana one could have returned to the Soviet trauma of the war in Afghanistan (1979-1989), which knocked on the door of a sheer number of families, particularly in Kazakhstan. The historical record imprinted in a 5-year research project involving three countries of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan), is called “Memories of the Flame of Afghanistan”. Based on the ‘Oral history’ method it summarizes the stories of those who were induced to fight in appalling conditions of the landlocked country that one barely knew. NUPSR has interviewed the project manager, Gulden Ashkenova, who told us more about the project.

Please tell us about the documental film.

The film is the first part of the larger project called “Memories of the Flame of Afghanistan” which also includes the publication of the book in three volumes. The research was conducted in three countries of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan). The film was based on memories and interviews of military operations participants in Afghanistan during the ten-year war.

Tell us, please, how did the idea to make such a documentary appear?

We already had a similar project based on the method of “Oral history”: “Deportation of Peoples to Kazakhstan in 1930-1950: the common history”. The main task of sociological research was a retrospective collection of information on deportation to Kazakhstan in 1930-50s to get the inside scoop from direct participants – Koreans, Chechens, Germans, Poles etc. We created a database of 82 interviews collected in Kazakhstan, Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Germany, Moldova, Turkey. It also included those who were investigating the study subject from Russia, South Korea, Great Britain, USA, Turkey.

We liked the technique of “Oral history” and when I discussed a topic for the next project with my colleagues, I recalled the story of my father who served in Afghanistan. Moreover, this topic is comparatively poorly understood in Kazakhstan. In general, there is information about the soldiers-internationalists that is more focused on Russia, however, about the soldiers from the Central Asia, it is little said. Project leaders Marlene Laruelle and Botagoz Rakisheva supported that idea, advised us, and so we began our work. The project was proactive and lasted almost 5 years.

How did you find the respondents? Did you face challenges while gathering data?

In Kazakhstan, there were no difficulties. We searched our first respondents among our friends, naturally, it was my father (Shalov Tukembai). He served in the province of Kandahar (1979-1981), the place of active fights that time. We resorted to the “Union of Disabled and Veterans of War in Afghanistan” in Astana. The latter supported us, gave us a way, helped by establishing contacts with soldiers-internationalists. We are very thankful.

Also, difficulties did not arise for our colleagues in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. In Uzbekistan, Igor Biryukov helped us, he was a military reporter in Afghanistan in the 1980s. I should emphasize that he worked with a great enthusiasm for the project. Project leaders in Tajikistan: Muzaffar Olimov and Saodat Olimova. Muzaffar Olimov’s brothers were also ex-soldiers-internationalists – Olimov Murtazo (1979-1981) and Olimov Zikriyo (1982-1983).

Co-supervisor of the project in Kazakhstan, Murat Uspanov, a former military officer, whose close friends were also internationalists. It turns out that this exact topic of the project was close to all project managers and was a living part of our families, friends, and relatives.

What do you remember most from the stories that your respondents shared?

All interviews were interesting, informative and content-rich. Before their service in Afghanistan, almost none of the soldiers had any idea of the country, they only knew that there was a war. Many Tajik veterans were translators and intelligence operatives while serving in Afghanistan.

Quite unique interviews were received from veterans in Uzbekistan. For example, an interview with a former first-class pilot, a chief pilot Kadyr Nadzhibulla – Atabaev. I think one can prepare an additional documentary about that.

I will not forget the interview of Gala Beisekeev (1981-1981, Kabul, Special Forces Airborne Group). His story centers around the following: in the mountains, he hid his comrade-in-arms, who died in battle, so that the mujahedeen did not find him. “I was a sapper, I had hidden him. It turned out that we served with him, and he died, we recaptured him, and then hid him in the riverbed. There was a gutter, water flow from the mountains, and some kind of baths were formed. I tied the stones, and down, because it was summer time he could quickly be deteriorated”.

Another interview with Yuri Hadjiev (1981-1982, the province of Herat, Medical Battalion) touched me too. He told me how they could not eat or sleep but only save the wounded soldiers. I cannot even imagine what guys who came to Afghanistan, being 18-year-old soldiers, could experience.

What would you like to convey with that project?

The war in Afghanistan is part of our history and it is important for us to preserve and pass this story further. The film and books are aimed to introduce the heavy military fate of young soldiers to the modern youth. The Afghan war is not only a tragedy but also the courage and valor of those who fell to share those ordeals. For me, this is the very important project, as it touched my family.

NUPSR expresses its gratitude to Gulden Ashkenova and the whole staff of the research institute “Public Opinion”.

]]>https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/09/24/memories-of-the-flame-of-afghanistan/feed/0nupsrDSC_0203DSC_0208Graduates of MA in Political Science and International Relations talk about their experience at NUhttps://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/07/02/graduates-of-ma-in-political-science-and-international-relations-talk-about-their-experience-at-nu/
https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/07/02/graduates-of-ma-in-political-science-and-international-relations-talk-about-their-experience-at-nu/#respondSun, 02 Jul 2017 17:36:47 +0000http://nupsreview.wordpress.com/?p=1290Galiya Rakhimzhanova:

MAPSIR is an exciting adventure full of fascinating moments, challenges and life lessons, victories and failures, a unique experience with outstanding people. This is how I would describe my two years at Nazarbayev University. I discovered a new world and started to think about so many interesting questions that had never crossed my mind before. Most of all, I am deeply grateful to our Professors, who generously shared their knowledge and experience, and encouraged us to look behind the curtain of science. This program was never easy, but every single day was worth of the new knowledge and personal growth that I received.

Zhamilya Mukasheva:

I’ve had a great time while attending Nazarbayev University’s MAPSIR Program. The university itself creates a wonderful academic environment – with interesting conferences, presentations, seminars, and meetings, a great library filled with many new and interesting books; and its students, always willing to discuss academic matters and what is happening in the world at the moment. The MAPSIR Program on its own is a very challenging one, yet you could learn a lot here. Professors within this program have different approaches to how a political science research should look like as well as they have diverse research interests. As a result, you are able to broaden your horizons by learning from different perspectives o and taking courses on completely different subjects within political science – from theory of just war to experimental politics. In this way, the program gives you an academic freedom to select the research topics of your interest for your master’s thesis, and to select methods which are more appealing to you. There are many other things which I love about this program: willingness of professors to help in any matter, interesting discussions in seminars, opportunity to spend a semester abroad. For example, I was selected to study abroad in Germany through the Erasmus Mundus program. In sum, I am happy for choosing this program and I will miss my time at Nazarbayev University.

Aizhan Kakenova:

Above all, the MAPSIR program enabled me to grow personally. Since I was the first graduate of the NU in 2010, I was already endowed with such a great opportunity to meet various Professors and staff of SHSS. However, the Master program is absolutely different from the undergraduate studies and this was crucial for my further growth. MAPSIR had deeper and more cohesive information about the real politics. It also allowed students to choose their own specialization within the program. My direction was the post-Sovietregion where I studied the “Eurasianism” process as well as Kazakhstan’s internal system. Therefore, for my thesis studies I have chosen to investigate the effects of the Kazakhization on the ethnic minorities’ and their opportunities. This program is a great choice for talented people!

Madina Bizhanova:

If I have not been accepted to the MAPSIR program at Nazarbayev University, I would never know, how professional the SHSS Faculty is and how smart and thought-provoking are students in Kazakhstan. If you would you like to improve your critical thinking and touch upon the Western education system and culture, but doing so while staying in Kazakhstan? This is the right place. If you ask me what this program gave me, I would say, it exposed me to people, people in their profile fields that I respect, admire and can learn a lot from.

I explore three key narratives of nationhood in Kazakhstan, identify which of the three poses the greatest potential harm in excluding minority groups, and suggest ways to mitigate its harms. In examining the contradictory and complementary narratives circulating at different levels and spheres, we may note that they are all still in the crucial process of competition with one another in the marketplace of ideas. This speaks to the importance of this research in its consideration of the particular kind of narratives that may serve our justice-oriented ends. Namely, it is ultimately desirable for these narratives to compete in a Madisonian manner as per Smith’s (2003) suggestion, considering that the post-Nazarbayev future of Kazakhstan may likely involve more frequent and direct clashes among opposing camps. In recognizing the constructed nature of the narratives and identifying the problematic elements which constitute such narratives in terms of potential exclusivity towards minority groups such as non-ethnic Kazakhs, we may undertake preemptive measures to secure a more inclusive future for Kazakhstan in a more efficient manner. Given that President Nursultan Nazarbayev, an individual who surely senses the urgency in carrying out such measures in the status quo given the looming sense of his own mortality and the deteriorating state of the country’s economy, is making full use of his unique capabilities in drawing resources toward securing stability in Kazakhstan for the near future surely hints at the political relevance of my argument and its implications. Moreover, the fact that Nazarbayev himself does not wholly control the most potentially harmful narrative, the nationalist narrative, only solidifies the urgency of considering the ways to mitigate the emergence of the most dangerous form of such a narrative in the uncertain, post-Nazarbayev future.

Firstly, we may establish the importance of examining national narratives in general. Meral and Smith (2015) put forward that institutionalized narratives of nationhood have long-term effects which most of us deeply care about on some level (90). Namely, narratives affect the standardized history taught in schools nationwide, our socialization, popular and elite understandings of rightful and desirable community membership, and views held on the policies most likely to advance our shared interests and values (2015, 90). To illustrate, the nature of Israel’s dominant narrative of nationhood is such that it challenges “pluralistic, egalitarian policies toward ethnically distinct immigrants or domestic minorities whenever those policies raise worries that Jews will no longer be sovereign in Israel” and has consequently manifested in Israel’s decision to limit rights of family reunification for those who marry residents of the West Bank or Gaza Strip (2015, 89).

Secondly, we may establish the importance of making judgments on national narratives. Although Smith concedes that institutionalized narratives “shape and limit possibilities for political change,” he is optimistic that they are not wholly determinative in that they “always provide opportunities for reinterpretation and elaboration that… can result in more inclusive and egalitarian national narratives” (2015, 76). Again, Israel’s potential for more inclusive and egalitarian national narratives lies in its Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, which elaborates beyond the necessity of Jews having their own state in Israel and may thus serve to strengthen Israeli’s recognition “that what it means to be Jewish has been a continuing, contested historical construction, and that Israelis have some real choice about how to define what is most important to their national identity in the twenty-first century” (2015, 89-90).

We may move on to establish the three kinds of national narratives present in modern-day Kazakhstan. Firstly, the Kazakhness narrative is succinctly put in the statement that “we, the people of Kazakhstan, united by a common historic fate, [are] creating a state on the indigenous Kazakh land” and is readily identifiable in the 1990 Declaration of Sovereignty of the Kazakh SSR, the 1995 Constitution, Nazarbayev’s speeches in 1999, the Kazakhifying of city and street names, invocation of the Kazakh Khanate, and state-sponsored cinema focusing on an ethnocentric narrative of national history (Laruelle 2014, 2-3). Secondly, the Kazakhstanness narrative centers on the notion that the multi-nationality of Kazakhstan, facilitated by the ‘hospitality’ of the country’s native Kazakhs, has “engendered a supra-ethnic civic identity” and is readily identifiable in the framing of Kazakhstan’s Assembly of the People as a “laboratory of the friendship of the peoples” (2014, 7-8). Thirdly, the transnational narrative rests on the notion that interconnectivity and globalization, as exemplified by Kazakhstan-2030, Strategy 2050, the 2010 OSCE presidency, the 2016 UN Security Council non-permanent seat, nuclear diplomacy since 1994, EXPO 2017, and Bolashak, have transformed Kazakhstan and its integration into the international community of modern states. For instance, the reasoning behind Astana and its architecture is that the “traditional dichotomies (north/south, urban/rural) would be overcome by the capital and therefore, by metaphorical extension, by the country as a whole” on its path of progress (2014, 11).

Thirdly, we may make judgements on the desirability of these three narratives according to our own set criteria of maximum inclusivity of groups in Kazakhstan. Kazakhness and Kazakhstanness tend to engage in “a self-celebration of the nation’s identity, regardless of how it is described, that is an ethnic or as a civic nation” due to their self-referencing and inwards-looking nature (2014, 15). This is not an inherently negative feature, but what it offers in terms of its maximum inclusivity potential pales in comparison to transnationalism’s offerings. That is, transnationalism “transcends the mere identity of the nation by offering a content that decenters it from itself… [in that it] is not linked by its own essence to the Kazakh/stani nation” (2014, 15). Our intuition regarding this narrative’s desirability may be supported by what is practiced in reality, considering that Nazarbayev, an individual who has a large stake in the long-term sustainability of Kazakhstan’s state ideology and legacy in the event of his absence, has increasingly opted for a development path “that could be called ‘Nazarbayevism’, following the example of ‘Kemalism’” (2014, 15). Indeed, the very fact that Nazarbayev does not shy away from tying the transnational narrative so closely to his own name and legacy is a clear indicator of the importance placed upon greater reliance on a transnational narrative for Kazakhstan’s more inclusive future.

Similarly, we may project the foreseeable future of these narratives and consequently pass judgement on the desirability of the nature of their projected developments. Kazakhstanness is set to diminish over time given that Slavic minorities make up an increasingly reduced part of the population of Kazakhstan and that they are likely to “see their ethnic rights preserved in a folkloric way in an increasingly Kazakh-centered and Kazakh-speaking state… [provided that] the engine of consensus remains the country’s economic success and its ability to deliver the growth of living standards it promises” (2014, 16). Kazakhstanness is also set to be subsumed in the larger transnationalism narrative given that the Eurasian Union project has an uncertain and contested future, especially since the 2014 Ukrainian crisis which had ultimately undermined any popularity that the Eurasianist ideology may have enjoyed in Kazakhstan (2014, 16). Interestingly, the future of transnationalism in a post-Nazarbayev period is difficult to pin down with any certainty given the inherent challenge of establishing a “‘post-Nazarbayev’ Nazarbayevism” (2014, 16).

Kazakhness’ projected future is also uncertain as it is the only narrative “not totally controlled by the regime and that is also crafted by political forces and social groups whose legitimacy precisely challenges the regime’s” (2014, 17). In the status quo, one of the few ways in which the government actually exercises some control over this narrative is in the official nationality policy of Kazakhstan which “reflects an uneasy compromise… [since] the Republic of Kazakhstan represents the ‘national sovereignty of Kazakhs’, [yet] it also recognizes ‘the sovereignty of the Kazakhstani nation as a unified political community of citizens’” (Surucu 2002, 396). This compromise between Kazakhness and Kazakhstanness is inherently contradictory and likely unsustainable in the absence of Nazarbayev’s political control, thus only emphasizing the importance of identifying and mitigating a potential turn for the worse of the Kazakhness narrative in terms of greater exclusivity against non-ethnic Kazakh groups. Given that we have established the reasonable desirability of the transnational narrative according to the criteria of maximum inclusivity of groups in Kazakhstan and that the Kazakhstanness narrative, whilst not inherently undesirable on its own, is projected to shift towards the preferred transnational narrative anyway, we may more or less set these cases aside for now in order to prioritize our efforts in addressing the potentially problematic elements of the Kazakhness narrative.

Hence, we may identify the elements of the Kazakhness narrative that appear problematic in terms of exclusivity even in the status quo of more or less state-controlled narratives of nationhood and that ought to be preemptively reigned in on. First of all, it is sometimes the case that the most fervent of nationalists see “a natural right to fill the content of this territorial nationalism with Kazakh symbols, historical myths, glories, heroes and cultural artifacts, things that the cosmopolitan urban intellectuals resist to identify with” (2002, 397). Here, what we may condemn is specifically the sense of entitlement and not necessarily the promotion of Kazakh symbols, for instance, in a measured manner. From the perspective that recognizes the constructed nature of national narratives in general, a sense of entitlement cannot reasonably exist for any given group, especially in the case that it brings about actions that alienate a group in society in a systematic manner. In addition, unfair characterizations of the opposing camp often take place, as exemplified by the term ‘Russophile’ which was coined in order to “delegitimize the ‘internationalist’ posture of the opposition… [so that] they are regarded as ‘mankurts’, traitors and subversive forces by Kazakh nationalists” (2002, 397). We may condemn such actions in that they serve no constructive ends, only polarizing already opposing camps from engaging with each other’s perspectives and wishes even when competing in a Madisonian manner. In their struggle for political and cultural hegemony in the status quo, it has been noted that “a sense of belonging to the same public space is starkly absent in the discourses” of the two camps, which does not bode well in the uncertain political future of Kazakhstan (2002, 396). Most damagingly, nationalists have been observed to “carefully monitor the other camp… [to] cultivate their own victimization” (2002, 397). One way in which this occurs is that the internationalism and cultural diversity of the status quo is perceived as a validation of the supposedly increasing Russian linguistic and cultural assimilation according to nationalists, so that ethnic diversity is necessarily a burden “to the stable development and modernization of the new republic” (2002, 397). We may condemn the zero-sum reasoning adopted in the nationalist mind that contributes to the victimization of their group in its attribution of the ‘other’ as necessarily the problem.

Lastly, we may establish one of the main reasons why inclusive narratives are desirable in the first place. That is, there exists the problem of political obligation that remains difficult to address even in hypothetically just states in political theory literature. The recent theories concerning why individuals obey the laws of their state that hold reasonable explanatory power, such as Smith’s (2003) stories of peoplehood, are those that hit closer to the messy nature of reality in which our reasons for political obligation could not stand further from our liberal conceptions of ourselves as rational individuals freely consenting to entering a state that we deem just. Still, if there is one takeaway from the many abstraction exercises of past theories, it is that an entire population’s acceptance of political obligation is less problematic from a liberal theorist’s perspective in the case that as many people as possible are treated justly by that very government. We can thus make use of Smith’s argument concerning the importance of recognizing the constructed nature of our political obligation to our own state and consequently producing a more inclusive story of peoplehood so that we may achieve the desirable end of a state in which as many people as possible are treated justly, perhaps making the reality of political obligations less pessimistically problematic.

In conclusion, I have set a wholly subjective path, guided by the criteria of maximum inclusivity, that leads to my judgments on the present narratives of nationhood in Kazakhstan, of which Kazakhness poses the greatest potential harm to minority groups, and to my suggestions on their preferable future forms, free from potentially harmful features that may tip the scales of a given narrative towards exclusivity.

References

Laruelle, Marlene (2014). The Three Discursive Paradigms of State Identity in Kazakhstan: Kazakhness, Kazakhstanness, and Transnationalism. Nationalism and Identity Construction in Central Asia. Dimensions, Dynamics, and Directions. London & Lanham. xxiv-173.

Meral, U. and Smith, R. (2015). Narrative Structures and the Politics of Peoplehood. Political Peoplehood: The Roles of Values, Interests, and Identities. Chapter 3: 66-91.

Smith, Rogers (2003). Ethically constitutive stories of norms of allegiance. Stories of Peoplehood: The Politics and Morals of Political Membership. Cambridge University Press. 129-174.

]]>https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/narratives-of-nationhood-in-kazakhstan/feed/0nupsrMAPSIR trip to New York Cityhttps://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/mapsir-trip-to-new-york-city/
https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/mapsir-trip-to-new-york-city/#respondMon, 15 May 2017 03:33:03 +0000http://nupsreview.wordpress.com/?p=1205Our trip to New York City between April 30th – May 9th has been marked by many notable events. The main purpose of my trip was participation at the ASN Annual World Convention which was organized by the Association for the Study of Nationalities at the Harriman Institute, Columbia University. There I presented my paper which is a part of my Master thesis: “Implementation of the World Bank Projects in Kazakhstan”. The papers presented by my groupmates include “Explaining ethnic conflict prevention mechanism in Kazakhstan” (Madina Bizhanova), “The Politics of Jury Trials in Kazakhstan” (Slyamzhar Akhmetzharov). While applying to this conference, I was thinking that it would be a great starting experience for young researchers. In fact, my expectations were met.

I have also attended several panels during the 3-days Convention, which focused on a wide area of issues which are of scholarly interest in the Eurasian region, such as nation-building, regime dynamics, political conflicts, education, gender issues, and so on. Moreover, there have also been book panels, as well as the presentation of various documentaries.

Next, I and a couple of my classmates also had an opportunity to present our works on the Graduate Student Workshop on Public Policy in Kazakhstan. The workshop took place at the School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA) at Columbia University.

At the same time, the trip was not limited to only academic events. Besides participating in the conference at Columbia University and meeting with the faculty at the Harriman Institute, we also visited Fordham University where we met with Professor Olena Nikolayenko and students majoring in Political Science and International Studies. We had a chance to hold “Youth Culture in Kazakhstan” Seminar, during which we talked about the current interests of youth in Kazakhstan, introduced our education system with its peculiar opportunities, Kazakhstani student associations abroad, etc.

In addition, we also had a great opportunity to visit the office of the Open Society Foundations (Soros Foundation). We met with Mr. Michael Hall, Senior Policy Analyst at Open Society Eurasia Program, with whom we shared our research interests. We learned more about the activities of Open Society Foundations and, in particular, research opportunities at Open Society Eurasia Program.

The weather in New York City is rapidly changing. On one of the “raining cats and dogs” days, we walked to the United Nations headquarters. Our anger with wet clothes was instantly replaced by the excitement of staying at one of the world’s most important buildings and, in particular, seeing the halls of the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly.

In the long line of learning, there is always a competition with yourself. Participation in such an event undoubtedly contributed to my educational and professional growth by detecting my strong and weak spots. Bearing this in mind, I would like to encourage everyone interested in pursuing academic goals to apply.

Madina Bizhanova

It was a truly unforgettable experience to meet at the conference with the scholars such as Henry Hale, Alexander Cooley, and many others, whose books and articles we have covered during our university studies. In the same way, getting in touch at the conference with the fellow international peers who are doing their Ph.D. and Master programs in various fields enabled us to establish useful links for future collaboration in doing similar research.

Slyamzhar Akhmetzharov

This trip was definitely filled with meaningful events and positive impressions. During the week of our stay in one of the world’s most exciting, dynamic, and beautiful cities, we had a chance to interact with highly experienced and accomplished academics and political scientists from all around the world. I also had my first serious experience of presenting my research at the academic conference which is a good solid start in pursuing my future professional goals. I am grateful to the School of Humanities and Social Sciences and Nazarbayev University for assisting us with funding this trip and, in particular, to our program director Alexei Trochev, for helping us and organizing a number of the above-mentioned events for us.

Please join our program for further theses defense presentations, which are free and open to the public. We hope to see you there!

]]>https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/04/22/thesis-defense-season/feed/0nupsrIMG_0939ISFiT. More than just a student festivalhttps://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/03/06/isfit-more-than-just-a-student-festival/
https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/03/06/isfit-more-than-just-a-student-festival/#respondMon, 06 Mar 2017 17:11:50 +0000http://nupsreview.wordpress.com/?p=1133Representatives of more than 100 countries gathered together for 10 days at the international student festival, which took place in Trondheim, Norway. During the International Student Festival in Trondheim (ISFiT) about 500 students worldwide discussed the topic of discrimination from different perspectives.

Screenshot from the Google maps.

Historical background:

Since the beginning of the festival in 1990, the international student festival biennially gathered youth from all over the world to promote peace, trust, and unity across the borders. In 1997 the project called “Dialogue groups” was launched. It gathers participants to meet on neutral territory with the only purpose to promote dialogue through fertile interactions. This year the citizens of Russia, Ghana, Uganda and Norway discussed the issues of LGBT people discrimination.

In 1998 the organizers came up with an idea to establish Student Peace Prize and recognize those who raise grassroots awareness, facilitate a dialogue, promote peace and fight for human rights. This year Hajer Sharief, the co-founder of Maan Nabniha (Together We Build It) in Libya and the member in the advisory committee for the progress study on youth peace and security mandated by the Security Council resolution 2250, became the recipient of the Student Peace Prize.

To start, we all one way or another have witnessed and experienced discrimination – be it gender, age or political activity. Discrimination is expressed in two forms: direct and indirect. If the former comprises different treatment due to race, religion or gender etc., the latter deals with practice, policy or rule design that are not equally applied to everyone. At the festival students from the Faroe Islands to Malaysia explored discrimination, which is here, big, but with efforts to be put can be lessened by each participant in their respective countries.

It took 6 hours 14 minutes to arrive at the destination point of Trondheim from Oslo by train. Upon arrival, all participants were welcomed in the red building called Studentersamfundet (or simply Samfundet). Driven by the statement that “Samfundet will be the natural meeting place for students in Trondheim” it has its own executive organ with the Finance Board and the Council, which ensure operations of all activities (i.e. thematic meetings, cultural events, bars, and cafes).

Photo credit: foto.samfundet.no

In foyer of the Samfundet participants could meet their host families. As a side note host families didn’t know whom they provide a place to stay for 10 days and students didn’t know where they would live. For example, I was appointed to a local resident, a 25-year-old nurse. It turned out that we have so much in common, e.g. we love reading about medicine and watching surgeries online.

Within 16 different workshops (e.g. media, law/policy, history, religion etc.) participants had a chance to get to know each other in smaller groups and share their visions on specific issues related to the topic of the ISFiT.

Some of the festival participants shared their impressions about the ISFiT.

Alexander Costa is an international business student at Aalto University, Finland. Half-Italian, half-Finnish, he has a passion for cultures, new people, and coffee.

“ISFiT is the people. Around 450 nationalities are represented, each one with their own cultures. However, despite these differences, everyone is ready to build a bridge and accept other. Never before have I had the opportunity to meet so diverse people, and actually feel so similar to them.”

Lin Nguyen is a Vietnamese by ethnicity but was born and grew up in Ukraine. Studies at the Institute of International Relations in Kyiv. She is fond of the history of colonialism, marine law, scuba diving and intellectual game “what? where? when?”.

“I often feel lonely in a big group of people but ISFiT is not that case. It is impressive how people from so different countries can be so alike. ISFiT is all about finding your soul mates from another corner of the world. Even though we live far away from each other and speak different languages, we share the same values; have the same hobbies and struggle with the same philosophical problems. ISFIT will not give you any chance to feel lonely: lots of laughs, smiles, hugs and of course – discos. Also, ISFITers are very talented and active people; I cannot help but get inspired and motivated. Now every time I look at the world map hanging on the wall above my bed, I will think about my lovely soul mates from ISFiT.”

Idris Bangnam is from Cameroon, now he’s studying Information Systems and Technology in Moscow, Russia. Apart from his keen interest in diplomacy and conflict analysis, Idrisloves volunteering, working with people and for people, traveling and discovering new places and people, playing soccer, table tennis, singing, and dancing.

“Today’s world is changing at a very fast pace and many of our common values and cultures are being altered with these changes. ISFiT is a strong answer to such challenges in the 21st century. It presents and international platform and a non-discriminative dialogue arena for young people and students all across the world, who come together, leaving behind their differences while focusing on the things that make them united and connected. Personally, I think that ISFiT is not just an international gathering but it is more of a celebration. Celebrating living diversity, ISFiT is an initiative to highly encourage and support at all levels, from locally to internationally.”

In the “History” workshop I attended we discussed various discrimination related issues and shared our stories. Apart from the workshops, all participants had a chance to go to plenary sessions devoted to topics such as race&prejudice, refugees’ rights, gender&sexuality, indigenous people, discrimiligion: Christianity and Islam. The Project day was another special event of the festival to listen to and ask questions to speakers who fight discrimination in their respective fields. One of the motivational speeches was delivered by Daraka Larimore-Hall, Secretary of the California Democratic Party and Chair of the Santa Barbara County. By implementing skepticism to politics in a comedy manner he elaborated the topic of “Networking and key speaker”.

Imagine a room, a room full of young people. They speak English very well, they listen to music you listen to, they follow YouTube channels you follow – they are just like you apart from one distinct part. We all share different stories, or as Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, the Nigerian writer said that “the single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story.” As Kuleshov’s sequence of shots (a plate of soup, a girl in a coffin, a woman on a divan) demonstrated the importance of fragments and context in film editing, similarly personal stories of participants were crucial in a way one perceived a person or particular event. The more I learned about each of them, the better I felt a thing called empathetic observation, understood who they are and how we appeared in the same place in the end. With various series of experience, the participants were eager to discuss the following questions: What is history? What stories go untold and why? Who constructs historical reality? Whose stories have been changed? What is the purpose of changing these stories or keeping them quiet? What value should we place on the past? etc.

ISFiT is more than just a festival. It is such a valuable experience through which one might learn, how people can easily become an object of stereotypes and discrimination based on their religion, ethnicity, race or belief; how a single story can build one’s perception of you; how unbelievably troublesome and costly it can be to a student from Iraq to receive a visa, how we as human beings can mobilize narratives around not fictitious stories, but true ones.

After all, everything we experienced brought us some insights about ourselves and people around us. During those 10 days, I have seen that despite borders we share similar lifelines, and because of borders, we have various lifelines. To change yourself in general is a hard thing but changing in a connected and diverse environment makes that change easier.

“The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong in the broken places”,

Ernest Hemingway, A Farewell to Arms, 1929

Bonus: Norwegians can smile, even dance salsa and pretty good by the way, they are born with skis on their feet, and they love to freeze (i.e. open windows) because they do not like, as they say, «thick air». Norway is a very safe place to live in. During my stay, I haven’t seen a single policeman on the street, but many Tesla cars and law-abiding citizens.

P.S. Special thanks to the best group leaders (Tomaris, Gretha, Theresa and Ida)!

Varvara Karaulova, a successful Moscow student, who wanted to join the terrorist organization of Islamic state (ISIS/Daesh) in December 2016 was sentencedto 4.5 years behind bars. This case illustrates that in the digital era, the process of radicalization and online recruitment is growing into an epidemic. In this ruthless battle, the importance of which could not be any graver, countries tend to cooperate with communication companies and other states to limit the spread of extremist Web content to avoid such scenario as of Karaulova and the rest. On that subject, two Kazakhstani experts were interviewed to shed light on the issue in the country.

How online radicalization occurs

It is beyond debate that the Internet has benefits on a global scale, but simultaneously, some of its user-generated content, encompassing blogs, social networks, discussion and graphic material sites, produce a problem called online radicalization. Along with virtual information dissemination and its free exchange, the Internet provides almost an unlimited access to every material, helps to create networks beyond borders and conceal one’s identity. Versatile in its purposes, the Internet specifically in the hands of terrorists can be used for fund-raising, sharing amalgam of specific information such as how to remain undetected by security services, and since recently even how to prevent drone attacks.

The features of the present online radicalization, “a process whereby individuals through their online interactions and exposures to various types of internet context, come to view violence as a legitimate method of solving social and political conflicts”, erase the boundaries between states’ geographical distance. For extremists and terrorists, the Internet has a specific role: ability to “reach” geographically unreachable individuals. According to J.M. Berger, a fellow with the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, The Hague and an affiliate of the SAFE Lab at Columbia University, the process of online recruitment includes four stages:

1) first contact with a potential recruit (mainly through radical and mainstream Muslim online communities); 2) creation of a “micro-community” in which recruiters are encouraged to guard themselves against the outside world;3) a shift to private communications by using private messaging function in application with strong encryption; 4) encouragement of an action, when some recruits become social media activists while others go to hijra (“emigration”) to join a terrorist organization.

Screenshot from Twitter. One of the accounts of “Authentic Tauheed”.

“Authenic Tauheed”led by English-speaking radical Muslim cleric Abdullah Faisal, who has changed from supporting Al-Qaeda to a pro-Islamic State orientation. However, there are other Twitter, Facebook, Paltalk and YouTube accounts.

Academic focus

There is a sound understanding of the problem by scholars on the given issue that can be measured by the involvement of the academic community to elaborate it. According to the Google scholar results, for the last three years, the number of scholarly works in this domain has tripled (British and American spelling was used simultaneously by the next command: “internet radicalization” OR “internet radicalisation” and “online radicalization” OR “online radicalisation”). Since recently, in order to investigate massive online data, some scholars think that analyzing ‘big data’, by shifting from manual identification to algorithmic techniques, can be helpful to prevent online radicalization. As the Internet grew it was almost impossible to “digest” all given information simply because the number of such groups on the Internet grows exponentially. As a response, experts either collaborate with computer scientists or study machine learning techniques to collect primary data.

In Kazakhstani realities, a social portrait of a terroristis the following: an unemployed young man, around 28 years old with secondary education, without special religious education, married, with children. However, in terms of online radicalization both interviewed experts, Yulia Denissenko, Head of Association of Legal Entities “Religions research centers association”, and Anastassiya Reshetnyak, a young researcher, are on the same page. They claim that anyone who is in a difficult situation, marginalized or dissatisfied with society/state might become a subject of online recruitment.

More specifically, “the online recruitment can work out when these two conditions are met: supply must comply with demand and when the level of internal stress exceeds the norm,” says Yulia Denissenko. She continues: “No one is immune from the second condition. Everyone has their own problems, failures associated with work or residence, even age-related changes can provoke serious stress.” Her conclusion is that no one has a perpetual ‘insurance’ from falling into a radical group. Add to this low level of critical consciousness, gaps in education/upbringing, which in its all levels is sought to impose dependency, plus many other aggravating factors – hence, we won’t get a rosy picture.

Such terroristic organizations as ISIS invest a substantial amount of efforts to recruit potential allegiants via social networks. As Anastassiya Reshetnyak claims, “the most popular method of social networks’ use is the creation of groups in messengers like WhatsApp and Telegram, where group members share videos, extremist content texts. The main ‘advantage’ of radicals here is their ‘black-and-white view’ of the world and ‘simple’ recipes to improve one’s living situation.”

How to counter online radicalization

Online radicalization could also be tackled online – in social networks and blogs that people use every day. Millions of people open daily their social network apps, scroll the newsfeed and interact with each other. It wouldn’t be a trouble all to find extremist propaganda in the Web. For example, ISIS has a series of English-speaking pictographs depicting its military operations. EU’s Radicalisation Awareness Network(RAN) has several suggestions for those involved in countering online extremism and radicalization by using the potential of social networks. Here are some bullet points one can use as an antidote to tackle online radicalization and extremism, which might be adopted by popular in Kazakhstan Vkontakte social network:

– ‘Counstructive counter speech’ was the most popular successful type of content;– Use a wide range of voices to deliver your messages effectively;– Make your target group very specific;– Keep posts simple to enable snowball effect: don’t post a lot of text (unless it is emotional content);– Upload videos directly to Facebook and use subtitles (because often people don’t play the sound);– Find supporters with a big reach (e.g. Michelle Obama’s #BringBackOurGirls). Use these people as influencers. Bring them to share your story within their network.– Post at least one piece content a day.

For Kazakhstan, such a technique can be used as a pilot version, for example in Vkontakte and Facebook group like Information analysis center “Ansar”of the Directorate of Religious Affairs of Aktobe oblast. Communication work at the local level is crucial and there is an urgent need to work on a strategy handling online radicalization, collaborating with special Kazakhstani and foreign organizations.

Adopted last year, the resolution 70/291 of the United Nations General Assembly underlines the urgent need to counter extremism and radicalization processes online. The collaboration of the year between Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube in terms of curbing the spread of online terrorist content gives hope to a more efficient work of decreasing global online extremist content by creating “hashes” database. Moreover, the next step can also be an invitation to join the campaign of all respective stakeholders.

Since 2007 the number of Internet users in Kazakhstan grew in 18 times. As the number of people with Internet access increases, so are the chances for those who operate online to recruit individuals and those to be recruited respectively for joining the ranks. This relationship is not that simple, however, presents the general idea behind that it is easier to get radicalized online nowadays than ever before without any physical contact with your discourser. In most cases, the first response of any government is to increase censorship by regularly monitoring the destructive Web content and Kazakhstan is no exception. For instance,according toCommittee of National Security of Kazakhstan monthly 70 000 online extremist materials are being neutralized and around 40 web resources are being blocked.

Our expert, Yulia Denissenko, asks “why only the government should be responsible for the fight against extremism (including online radicalization)? It is very convenient to choose a “guilty one” and take him to a task. At my job I often communicated with mothers of terrorists. You know, they can not remember the last time they hugged children and told them, how they love them. Regarding government measures – in Kazakhstan, there are several programs that directly or indirectly are connected with the anti-terrorism agenda. Recently the Ministry of Religious Affairs and civil society was founded, which aims to unite the efforts of the state and public institutions in the fight against radicalization and extremism.”

Anastassiya Reshetnyak continues that “effectiveness of the new Ministry can be assessed at least a year after its operation.” Moreover, there is no reliable statistics about recruited, online recruited and deradicalized people in Kazakhstan, as expert says, “officials claim this is a security requirement that is done for a reason to feel a fewer sense of community for recruited with those who share similar views.”

Answering the question, how can the Kazakhstani government lessen the recruitment and radicalization processes, both interviewees gave their own perspectives. Whereas Yulia Denissenko thinks that state officials should “work on the quality rather than the quantity, by transitioning to global projects in the education, social services, raise their own personnel”, Anastassiya Reshetnyak underlines that “it would be effective to actively involve civil society and NGOs in the implementation of such programs.” What is more important, experts agree on – is to improve the image of the government, by increasing the level of trust to state institutions, adequately respond to public moods and solve resonant issues in time.

Without question, the 21st century is the era of digital radicalization. Such virtual peps in terms of sermons, videos, and blogs that are viral and can be the last trigger for some extreme activities. Therefore, governmental attacks should be and are conducted on two fronts: offline by offering to lost ones’ multiple alternatives and ensuring that laws are enforced and online by proactively challenging cancer-like extremist online ideas with countering malicious virtual propaganda. Non-response to online challenges can hit like a straight jab at the current countering policy, knocking out for a while in this non-stop confrontation.

Prepared by Madina Bizhanova

]]>https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/01/24/radicalization-by-means-of-social-media/feed/0nupsrpicture1picture2screen-shot-2017-01-24-at-9-23-24-ampicture5Debates around temporary registration in Kazakhstanhttps://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/debates-around-temporary-registration-in-kazakhstan/
https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/debates-around-temporary-registration-in-kazakhstan/#respondFri, 20 Jan 2017 04:21:51 +0000http://nupsreview.wordpress.com/?p=1062On January 16, 2017 a meeting titled “Passions about Registration: How to reform the registration system of citizens in Kazakhstan?” was held by the Discussion club “PaperLab” in Astana. The club invited public figures and experts, among whom were Yevgeny Zhovtis – the director of the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, Zauresh Battalova – the head of public campaign, Jokhar Utebekov – the lawyer of Almaty City Board of Lawyers, and Malika Tukmadiyeva – the researcher from PaperLab, who have expertise in this issue. Moreover, the representatives of civil service and institutes came to the meeting, including the Minister of Information and Communications – Dauren Abayev, the Deputy of Majilis – Irina Smirnova, and others.

Photo credit: the Soros Foundation-Kazakhstan

All the problematic aspects of a temporary registration of citizens were raised during the discussions. Jokhar Utebekov talked about low-quality service of Service Centers for Population (CONs) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The Minister Abayev answered different questions from an audience and talked about the preparation of the online registration system, which will be done in the end of January. He agreed that the mechanisms of implementation of registration process are inappropriate. Yevgeny Zhovtis talked about different groups of population such as orphans, disabled people and others, who were not considered during the implementation of the law. For example, some orphans do not have documents at all and in order to get a document one has to have a place of registration. In other words, there is an interrelated cycle, which does not solve the problem.

Human rights advocate noted that this law is not against terrorists but regular people. Instead this should have been beneficial to easily obtain pubic services rather than to control citizens, according to Yevgeny Zhovtis. Moreover, authorities of law enforcement should never interfere with the matters of registration, while in Kazakhstan they were directly engaged in the development of this provision, Zauresh Battalova says. Mr. Zhovtis supports her by arguing that the executive power in Kazakhstan proposes laws for themselves. In addition, Aida Aidarkulova from the Soros Foundation-Kazakhstan says that, “86% of Kazakhstani are online everyday, it means that the website of the Parliament should have been enhanced a long time ago in order to interact with the population in such situations.”

]]>https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/debates-around-temporary-registration-in-kazakhstan/feed/0nupsr15937068_1230504880364084_4162748408687462691_oHosting Syria peace talks in Kazakhstan: why and how?https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/1023/
https://nupsreview.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/1023/#respondTue, 17 Jan 2017 16:37:23 +0000http://nupsreview.wordpress.com/?p=1023Last December President Nazarbayev offered to hold Syrian peace talks in Astana during his telephone conversations with the leaders of Russia and Turkey (Inform.KZ, 2016). A day earlier, during his visit to Japan Putin informed that it is important to provide the current president of Syria, al-Assad and the opposition groups with a peace platform to restart the negotiation process. Interestingly, a day earlier Putin suggested Astana to be the next stop for Syrian peace talks (RadioLiberty, 2016). According to the Russian coalition Astana is an appropriate region for Syrian peace talks for many reasons. The Kazakh authorities approved this offer and agreed that Astana peace talks will be held on 23rd of January (Vlast.kz, 2017).

Photo credit: Al Jazeera

Since the Syrian crisis every day we observe how the situation is escalating into a severe bloodshed and murder of innocent children and women. According to the UN estimates, just in Aleppo, nearly 400,000 people have been killed, including 16,000 children (The UN, 2016). The war has also allowed extremist terrorist groups, including Daesh, to take hold in some parts of Syria and carry out human atrocities.

The latest reports of the successful evacuation of many civilians in Aleppo are, of course, good news. However, it would be wrong to see this as a sign that the conflict in Syria is ending. Therefore, leaders of Russia, Turkey, and Iran alongside with Nazarbayev see the importance of holding peace talks in Astana. In 2015 Astana has already hosted meetings between representatives of the Syrian opposition but previous meetings did not succeed. Since Kazakhstan is a good partner both to Russia and Turkey as well as Kazakhstan is a member of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Astana is believed to be a neutral mediator in the resolution of Syrian crisis. Moreover, this year Kazakhstan holds a non-permanent seat in the UN Security Council which increases Kazakhstan’s role in accomodating thepeace talks. However, to what extent it is something that Astana needs? What are potential costs and benefits of hosting such a serious but at the same time challenging talks?

Previous attempts to resolve Syrian crisis failed. The first informal meeting was initiated by Russian government in 2012 but invitation to the peace talks was declined by the leader of Syrian National Council, Abdel Baset Seda (Syrian opposition group). In 2012 Sarkozy initiated contact group “Friends of Syria” to find a solution on Syrian conflict and hold four meeting in that year. The 2012 Kofi Annan Peace Plan on Syria and its opposition groups also failed. Geneva I, Geneva II, and Geneva III Syrian peace talks also did not result in profound changes. On November 2013 Russia attempted to broker talks in Moscow between the Syrian government and Syrian opposition groups but these attempts also failed due to the failed agreement between the Kremlin and the White House on whether Assad should stay in office or not. Therefore, is it realistic that another shot of peace talks in Astana will do something positive about Syria?

Photo credit: Al Jazeera

From one perspective, Astana peace talks are promising. In his interview to the French journalists, Syrian President Assad claimed that his government is ready to negotiate “on everything” in Astana. Moreover, during his interview Assad acknowledged that there were mistakes from the government side and that his government is ready to cooperate with moderate opposition groups if they lay down arms. Thus, Assad on behalf of the Syrian government is open to peaceful cooperation. Interestingly, the Jaish al-Islam armed opposition group led by Mohammad Alloush has agreed to back Astana peace talks by stating that “Astana is a process to end the bloodletting by the regime and its allies. We want to end this series of crimes.” (Al Jazeera, 2017). However, the number of other rebel groups as Ahrar al-Sham refused to attend Astana since in their opinion Syria issue will not be end in one day meeting (Al Jazeera, 2017). Therefore, whether engaged parties will reach ceasefire is a question.

However, from another perspective, whether Astana peace talks will be successful depends on the broker states. Since Iran is willing to include Gulf States such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar into the debate, it can be problematic for Russia because it is no secret that the Kremlin prefers to sustain Assad in his position while Gulf States support particular opposition groups. Thus, despite the fact Astana has agreed to hold these peace talks, it is essential to ensure that involved states’ interests are not in conflict but rather their interests will facilitate sooner rehabilitation of Syria.